The Danger of Chromotherapy

Despite the lack of scientific evidence for its effectiveness and its use of esoteric theories to
describe its mechanisms of action, chromotherapy has become popular. But is it safe?

S É B A S TIEN PO IN T

C hromotherapy, also known as color therapy, is a pseudomedicine based on a holis-

tic approach and on a mixture of esoteric and scientific concepts. In a nutshell, it
is the use of colored light applied on the skin or eyes to heal various health disor-
ders, assuming some (scientifically undescribed) beneficial effects of color on body and
mind. Traditionally, “color therapists” use white light sources to backlight colored filters.
Nevertheless, driven by recent progress in solid-state lighting technologies, light-emitting
diodes (LEDs) will probably become the most used light sources in chromotherapy. Some
LED-based chromotherapy lamps are already available on the market. The main interest
in LED lamps—in addition to their energy efficiency and long lifetime—is that they can
provide various colors directly depending on the nature of the semiconductor inside with-
out using any filter. Is the use of LEDs in chromotherapy without any risk?

50 Volume 41 Issue 4 | Skeptical Inquirer

Blue Light Hazard
In the last quarter of the twentieth century, the work of Ham,
Mueller, and Sliney (Sliney et al. 1976; Ham and Mueller
1989) opened the way to the description of photochemical
mechanisms of lesions on the retina during exposure to a
blue light source. To prevent such damages, the International
Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (IC-
NIRP), in its “Guidelines on Limits of Exposure to Inco-
herent Visible and Infrared Radiation” (1989), defines a blue
light action spectrum Bλ(λ) and exposure limits (expressed
in radiance) that are used in IEC 62471, which is the stan-
dard when dealing with exposure to sources of broad spec-
trum incoherent optical radiations. The application of this
standard is particularly justified for evaluating blue LED and
white LED (also called White Phosphor Coated LED, or
WPCLED, and made of a blue LED coated with phosphor),
which combine high radiance and a blue-enhanced spectrum,
as can be seen on Figure 1. In 2010, the French Agency for
Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety
(ANSES) published a collective expert report making an up-
date on the blue light risk associated with the use of commer-
cially available blue and white LEDs (Rapport de l’ANSES
2010). The results showed that it was possible to buy white
or blue LEDs lamps reaching the medium risk group (RG2),
potentially harmful to the retina of the eye if not diverted in
0.25 seconds.
In Europe, the design standards of lighting fixtures now
include photobiological safety requirements based on stan-
dard IEC 62471 or its application report IEC TR 62778. Sci-
entific work is still ongoing to better understand mechanisms
of blue light–induced damages and to improve prevention
( Jaadane et al. 2015; Behar-Cohen et al. 2011), but current
exposure limits seem to manage the risk for general lighting
well.
Metrology
As noted, to evaluate and limit exposure to blue light, the
ICNIRP has defined an action spectrum Bλ(λ) and a maxi-
mum permissible exposure value to short wavelengths. The
maximum of the blue action spectrum occurs between 435
and 445 nm, which is close to the blue peak of blue LEDs
or WPCLEDs, as we can see in Figure 2. The maximum
permissible exposure to these wavelengths is 106 J / (m2.sr).
The exposure Hb can be expressed as the product of a
quantity called blue light effective radiance Lb by the expo-
sition duration T. The knowledge of Lb allows classifying the
measured lamp in one of the four risk groups defined by IEC
Table 1: Definition of risk groups depending on
exposure duration (T) and Lb maximum values.
Figure 1: Spectrum of a blue LED (full line) and spectrum of the same LED
after having superimposed a phosphor coat to produce white light (dotted
line). Source: Sébastien Point.
62471 by comparison with some limits. Limits for Lb values
are made according to exposition duration values so that Hb
stays below 106 J / (m2.sr). Naturally, the risk group increases
as the duration required to exceed the permissible exposure
decreases (see Table 1).
When lamps or luminaires are measured and classified in
RG2 and RG3, standard application report IEC TR 62471-2
asks for some specific marking. That said, no specific mark-
ing is required for products classified in the no risk group
(RG0) or low risk group (RG1), but that does not mean that
the risk is absent in cases of inappropriate use, as for example
in chromotherapy.
Chromotherapy Risks
Chromotherapy uses the (alleged) beneficial effects of color
on the body and mind. There are generally said to be twelve
“therapeutic” colors, but entering the keywords “chromo-
therapy” or “color therapy” in the bibliographic database of
Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine does not yield
any medical research article that could help to understand
their characteristics. Information available in the websites of
color therapists does not provide a rigorous definition of the
twelve colors claimed beneficial. However, this could have
been easily done by giving a wavelength value for spectral
color or by describing the spectral composition in the case of
polychromatic radiation. Without this rigor in defining the
colors, it seems very difficult to establish a repeatable pro-
tocol, as the physicist may have difficulty reproducing the
color “lemon” (http://www.holistic-online.com/color/color_
lemon.htm) or “strong pink” (http://unicorn-denmart.blog-
Skeptical Inquirer | July/August 2017 51
 spot.com/2014/01/chromo-therapy-light-can-benefit-our.
html). The lack of rigorous definition of colors and light
sources disqualifies chromotherapy and is sufficient to refute
the “scientific” character that some color therapists seek to
fund their discipline.
Proponents usually associate these poorly defined colors
with specific therapeutic effects on the body and on the
mind. Of course, you could vainly search for a validated
treatment protocol. Generally, the color is projected on the
afflicted part of the subject, or on the eyes or even on the
acupuncture points. The biological mechanisms for illumi-
nated parts to see the color are not scientifically described,
but therapists argue that “color therapy works on various
Figure 2: Spectrum of a WPCLED (full line) and action spectra Bλ(λ) energy points to help balance your body via the full spec-
(dotted line). Source: Sébastien Point.
trum of visible light, each color addressing a distinct need”
(http://blog.sunlighten.com/chromotherapy-sauna-bene-
fits-color-therapy-explained/).
In some variants of chromotherapy, colors are associated
with “internal climatic energy” of the human body (heat, cold,
moisture, dryness, wind) and would be capable of triggering
a “climatic” opposite response from the body: for burns, for
example, applying a red light (heat symbol) will supposedly
cause an opposite response of the body (cold generation).
Clearly, the color therapists do not trouble themselves with
physics, scientific rigor, and evidence. Nevertheless, you can
find many courses, seminars, and books, as well as many en-
Figure 3.
thusiastic users and promoters. Indeed, as pseudomedicine,
chromotherapy can be provided by a nonmedical professional
in beauty or healthcare centers or even at home by individuals.
As noted, light emitting diodes (LEDs) are already used in
chromotherapy material and will probably become the pri-
Clearly, the color therapists mary light sources in coming years. Is it safe? Figure 3 shows
an example of chromotherapy LED exposure as shown on the
do not trouble themselves with website of a chromotherapy lamp manufacturer. Notice that:
•  The user’s head is only few inches from the lamp, and there
physics, scientific rigor, and is no evidence that the head-lamp distance is under control.
evidence. Nevertheless, you •  No eye protection is used.
• There is no evidence that exposure duration is under con-
can find many courses, trol.

seminars, and books, as well There is naturally no evidence that chromotherapy is sys-
tematically or widely used in the way shown in Figure 3—but
as many enthusiastic users nor is there evidence it is used differently. This uncertainty
raises a troubling question regarding the potential use of blue
and promoters. Indeed, as LEDs or WPCLEDs in a chromotherapy session. Even as-
pseudomedicine, chromo- suming that chromotherapy materials use only RG0 (no risk
group) and RG1 (low risk group) LED bulbs, would the prac-
therapy can be provided by a tice be safe so far without adapted eye protection and in con-
ditions where distance and exposure duration are not under
nonmedical professional in control? Lamps for chromotherapy cannot be considered as
a source for general lighting service (GLS) as defined in IEC
beauty or healthcare centers 62471. Lamps for chromotherapy must be seen as multipur-
pose lamps, as sunbed lamps, or as lamps for medical uses. As
or even at home by individuals. a consequence, Lb and risk groups for these kinds of lamps
should be given for a 200 mm exposure distance. It is not un-
realistic that users will place the light source only 200 mm
from their eyes. In such a case, for an LED bulb whose Lb

52 Volume 41 Issue 4 | Skeptical Inquirer

would be between 100 and 10,000 W/
m2/sr (range power of low risk group),
maximum permissible exposure dura-
tion is between 100 seconds and 10,000
seconds, which covers many potential
exposure situations. So permanent
retinal damages from overexposure is
possible if the user’s eyes are voluntary
exposed to a blue or white LED lamp
of some thousands of W/m2/sr (RG1
without marking required) at a distance
of 200 mm or less for a few minutes or
more. With RG0 LED lamps, risk is
lower but cannot be excluded either.
Conclusion
Although its promoters describe it as
a rational scientific method, chromo-
therapy is a pseudomedicine, and con-
sequently no real health benefits can be
expected from it. On the other hand,
there is some evidence that LEDs, even
when classified in the no-risk or low-
risk groups, can generate overexpo-
sure when critical parameters such as
exposure distance and duration are not
Subscribe to the digital edition of the SKEPTICAL INQUIRER
and read SI on your iPad, iPhone, or Android device!
Download your FREE sample issue today!
under control. We have good reason to
believe that some users of LED-based
chromotherapy material can not keep
these parameters under control. For
public safety, it is important that reg-
ulations or strong guidelines be put in
place to supervise and control poten-
tially dangerous practices such as chro-
motherapy. •
References
Behar-Cohen, F., et al. 2011. Light-emitting
diodes (LED) for domestic lighting: Any
risks for the eye? Progress in Retinal and Eye
Research 30: 239–257.
Ham, W.T.J., and H.A Mueller. 1989. The pho-
topathology and nature of the blue light
and near-UV retinal lesions produced by
lasers and other optical sources. In Laser
Applications in Medicine and Biology, M.L.
Wolbarsht, ed. (Plenum), pp.191–246.
IEC 62471, photobiological Safety of Lamps and
Lamp Systems.
IEC/TR 62471-2 Ed.1: Photobiological safety of
lamps and lamp systems—Part 2: Guidance
on manufacturing requirements relating to
non-laser optical radiation safety.
IEC-TR 62778 application of IEC 62471 for
the assessment of blue light hazard to light
sources and luminaires.
International Commission on Non-Ionizing
Radiation Protection. 1989. Guidelines on
limits of exposure to incoherent visible and
infrared radiation. Health Physics 105(1) (July).
Jaadane, I., et al. 2015. Retinal damage induced
by commercial light emitting diodes (LEDs).
Free Radical Biology and Medicine 84: 373–
384.
Rapport de l’ANSES. 2010. Effets sanitaires
des systèmes d’éclairage utilisant des LED
(Octobre).
Sliney, D.H., W.T.J. Ham, and H.A. Mueller.
1976. Retinal sensitivity to damage from
short wavelength light. Nature 260 (March
11):153–155.
Sébastien Point is a
French engineer and
physicist who led some
researches to develop
mercury-free lamps and
currently works in the
lighting industry. He is a
scientific rapporteur for blue light and vice
president of the non-ionizing radiation sec-
tion of the French radioprotection society, a
member of French skeptics association AFIS
and of the quarterly skeptic journal Science
& Pseudosciences. His talks, in which he
disassembles pseudoscientific practices,
are available on the Internet.
Skeptical Inquirer | July/August 2017 53